Tuesday, November 10, 2009

5th Anniversary of Scott's conviction - November 12

When I put up SII on December 26, 2003, I had hopes that truth and justice would prevail. If Scott was guilty, as millions thought he was, I wanted there to be real evidence, conclusive evidence.

I never saw such evidence. What was so convincing to so many millions of people just was not at all convincing to me. Scott Peterson was a total stranger to me. I had no vested interest in his innocence or his guilt. I just wanted evidence that he was indeed guilty. I am a proponent of the death penalty, and I am not a bit satisfied with the evidence that sent this man to death row. And I would not be satisfied with the evidence if he had gotten LWPP, or any other sentence.

But even beyond that, I've seen with my own eyes too many times -- that baby did not wash ashore. And that fact proves Scott Peterson is innocent.

It will be 7 years this Christmas Eve since Laci was abducted. Those who think Scott is guilty are confident they know what happened. Those of us who know he is innocent still search to find out the truth of what happened that day. Even though we may not be visible on public message boards like we were during the trial and the aftermath, does a day go by that we don't think about this case, don't wonder what in the world went wrong, what in the world can be done to correct this injustice?

I shall never forget what it was like standing outside that courthouse on November 12, 2004. I didn't get a seat in the courtroom that day, but I was right outside. It was surreal. The shouts and high-fives, the sign waving, the utter joy that these people felt.

There will yet be another day. A day when those same people who cheered at the verdict, not only those present at the courthouse but watching on television and listening on radio, all over the United States, and indeed, in many parts of the world -- a day when those same people will come face to face with the stark knowledge that an innocent man was convicted.

Hopefully, some of them will have the decency to hang their heads in shame.

But it will be a day of only muffled celebration, because with the joy of Scott's vindication will come the sorrow of Laci's friends and family (including Scott and his family) who must face yet another trial and having to learn the gruesome details of Laci's abduction and murder.

I have often said that the greatest injustice of a wrongful conviction is not to the innocent person convicted, but to the victim's family and dear friends who become so emotionally invested in the innocent person's conviction, only to be proven wrong. And then to have to go through it all over again. Some cannot get out of that emotional investment, and simply refuse to believe the convicted person is innocent, even when someone else is proven guilty. They rationalize that somehow, some way the innocent person convicted was involved.

It's much better to do it right the first time.

I know those of you who think Scott is guilty do believe it was done right the first time, but I don't. I've seen it with my own eyes too many times -- that baby did not wash ashore. That one fact proves Scott Peterson innocent.

----------------------------------------------

If you would like to respond to these comments, please visit The Justice Gang, and post your response on this thread. Registration is required. Or you can post your comment here.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wearing A Halo said...

So what is new MN? Do you have a fetal age of the fetus that "didn't wash ashore"? Better yet, do you have any evidence on the "planting" of Conner that was not presented in court and has nothing to do with tides, wind directions and storm surges, but, instead, having to do with actual "planting"? BTW--how many feet from the debri line was Conner found? TIA

Marlene Newell said...

Like I said before, WAH, everything I know is posted on SII.

Dr. Galloway determined the fetal age of the fetus that didn't wash ashore. You can find her testimony on SII.

How many feet from the debris line was Conner found? Why WAH, I was sure you knew the answer to that. None of the officers that processed the crime scene took that measurement. But, the pictues clearly show the baby north of the debris line, and the officers said the baby was between the debris line and the path -- which is north of the debris line. And Distaso said the baby was north of the debris line -- and surely Distaso woulnd't lie. Look at the exhibits and read the transcripts -- it's all in there WAH.

There's only two choices WAH -- either the baby washed ashore, or he was put there. Since he didn't wash ashore, he was put there. Unless you think the stork delivered him.

Anonymous said...

I do have a hard time to believe that Scott did commit these crimes but only he and Laci and the real killers wil ever know and all the people that high five tat day should be ashame of themselves and Ron , the stepfather who showed his true colors with a smile on his face with the picture of conviction with the picture of Scott's face should be ashame of himself but I do feel their pain of losing a love one before their time.

Anonymous said...

Wearing A Halo said...

Well then MN, you have NOTHING new.

Marlene Newell said...

Nope nothing new. What is already known is more than sufficient.

Anonymous said...

Wearing A Halo said...

Today is the day five years ago today! SLP guilty of first degree and second degree for the murders of Laci and Conner, respectively--11-12-04.

Marlene Newell said...

WAH, that 1st degree/2nd degree conviction is absolutely asinine. Laci was 7 1/2 months pregnant, and he was her husband, and he knew very well that she was pregant,and if he intended to kill her, he intended to kill the baby. Anyone not smart enough to know that if you murder the pregnant mother, the unborn child is going to also be murdered isn't smart enough to leave a pristine crime scene -- in fact 5 pristine crime scenes.

You only have 3 choices WAH:

1. Not guilty, which is the most obvious.

2. He did something to Laci, not intending to kill her but which caused her death, and subsequently Conner's death, and he panicked.

3. He intended to murder both of them.

Judge Delucchi really showed a lack of judicial judgment when he allowed that verdict to stand. And that millions of intelligent people swallowed it hook line and sinker is beyond my ability to understand.

Let's get some common sense and logic in this discussion, PLEASE!!!

Anonymous said...

Marlene I have followed your message boards, blogs and the like from day one. You are the only one
that makes sense to me and I wish to give kudos to you!! I have nothing but respect for you and your tireless efforts.

Marlene Newell said...

Thank you for the kind words. Are you aware of The Justice Gang? If you haven't joined, please do. The link is in the article.

Anonymous said...

You are quite welcome Marlene. I will think about joining the other
forum. I never sign up on message boards because they can get full of
drama and too heated at times. I have believed like you in Scott's
innocence from day one only to be called foolish, but I have several
reasons including many of your reasons for believing he will receive a new trial and a new outcome. I wish I contacted you sooner you and "The Voice Of Sanity" are my favorite bloggers.
You should be an atty Marlene! Stay
well and I look forward to more interesting posts from you.

Regards,

Susan

Burkey said...

How could a baby's body wash up over those rocks and be in such good physical shape?

Those pictures of the rocks, on the jetty, that's what kills me. I just don't see how a baby got up and past, if pushed by waves, without serious signs of wear/tear.

I really feel for everyone who lost this dear woman. I cannot imagine how it must feel to contemplate going through it all again.

But if it's possible for healing to happen between them and Scott (I don't have any idea and I doubt it, but miracles do happen)--he is the one with all the memories of Laci. Part of what must be so terrible about losing Laci this way was wondering what her last days were like, and what happened.

But, Laci's last years were with Scott, her hopes and dreams were with Scott, and though they had problems in their marriage, it seems clear to me, from looking at that nursery, and hearing the things that Peterson said about their marriage, that they would have made it through, that he loved her, and despite any ambivalence he might have had about being a father perhaps too early for him----that this did not define their marriage.

If they could take Scott back, they would get a lot of Laci, too.

The not knowing is so terrible, though, I can understand fleeing from the intense look one has to take at this case, to understand what happened. Me, I'd be hiding under the bed to this day, I'm sure.

Franklin said...

New to the blog; just have a few questions as I only know the basics everybody else knows: I notice the family asking for financial help for Scott; how much is going toward identifying the real killers? Have they hired some PI's seems this would be the surest means of exoneration. Also, I never heard anything about the Pasqual and Fran├žois guys Scott allegedly met up with in France. Did they work for the same company as him? How come I never heard anything about Interpol getting involved? Oh well, started reading the pwc-sii site & it inspired me to get the Amber Frey book; maybe it will answer my queries. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

What we already know is Scott Peterson is factually guilty and anything MN writes is pure fantasy and a joke.

Marlene Newell said...

"pure fantasy and a joke"? Really? Then why do you read this blog? And why do you fail to provide data and pictures to prove that my arguments are not based on reality? I've published all the data and pictures on which I've based my arguments -- it would be very easy to prove if I've made anything up or misrepresented the facts. And it certainly isn't a joke that an innocent man is on death row and a victim with her grieving family and friends have been denied justice. Nope, that's no laughing matter.

Justyce said...

Lol, sufficient enough that after 5 years Scott is still sitting on death row.

Bruce said...

I'm wondering why you have not called for the release of a man who has been in jail for murders he did not commit, was not even at the crime scene. This man has been in jail since the late sixties for these crimes. the only witnesses to testify, the killers themselves, have stated that he was not there. Yet this man sits in jail for murder. Please help free this wrongfully convicted man.

Bruce said...

I'm wondering why you have not called for the release of a man who has been in jail for murders he did not commit, was not even at the crime scene. This man has been in jail since the late sixties for these crimes. the only witnesses to testify, the killers themselves, have stated that he was not there. Yet this man sits in jail for murder. Please help free this wrongfully convicted man.

Marlene Newell said...

Bruce, I can't possibly be involved in righting every wrongful conviction. My resources are limited. However, if you know about this case, and want to write up an article for the blog, I'd be happy to publish it.

Marlene Newell said...

Justyce, you are woefully ignorant about how long the appellate process takes. Pathetically ignorant.